Proposed development of 8 houses and garages.

The Committee was minded to grant planning permission, contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation, and authorised officers to do so subject to a positive Habitat Regulations Assessment and no other material considerations or changes in policy arising.

(Proposed development of 8 houses and garages.)

(Councillor James had left the meeting and was not present during consideration of this application.  Councillor Bowen fulfilled the role of local ward member and accordingly had no vote on this application.)

The Senior Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application, and updates/additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet, as appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr G Poulton, of Luston Group Parish Council spoke in support of the scheme.  Mrs M Albright, the applicant, also spoke in support.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor Bowen, spoke on the application.

He made the following principal comments:

·        The proposed density was in keeping with the area and integrated well.

·        The provision of an orchard to the north of the site was a goodwill gesture.

·        The proposal would create no demonstrable harm.

·        There was no demonstrable need for affordable housing.  The last housing needs survey had been undertaken in 2009.  Two units were currently empty.  The possibility of discounted market housing had been dismissed by the Planning officer.

·        The developer had approached housing associations about the two semi-detached dwellings proposed but there had been no interest.  The other houses could be self-build for which there was considerable demand, or custom build.  The housing mix provided a good variety of family homes, including provision for home working reducing commuting, and for extended families. The properties were not large. The proposal related well to neighbouring properties and was well designed.

·        Most of the materials for the development would come from within the County and construction would involve a local workforce.

·        The developer was providing numerous hedges and trees and a good footpath to the village.

·        The developer had worked closely with the Parish Council.  The Parish Council supported the proposal.  There were no objections from local residents.  The proposal did accord with the Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP).

·        The proposal would enhance the village and make an attractive entrance to it.

·        The Conservation Manager (Historic Buildings) had no objection.

·        The Conservation Manager (Ecology) had commented that permission should not be granted until it could be demonstrated that the River Lugg catchment area could accommodate any potential additional phosphate loadings.

·        Contrary to the Informative set out in the report the applicant had made every effort to find a way forward.

·        He referenced the letters of support at section 5.2 of the report.

·        In conclusion, he supported the proposal.  If planning permission could not be granted at this stage because of the issue of phosphate discharge into the Lugg catchment he requested that approval be granted subject to that aspect being satisfactorily resolved.

In the Committee’s discussion of the application the following principal points were made:

·        A member expressed support for the views of the local ward member and the Parish Council. 

·        The proposal for 8 dwellings was acceptable and conformed to the density of development in the locality, avoiding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77